Rigpa on it; knowledge for schoolstudents. There are many Rigpa's and combinations. In 'naked awareness' I see clear as emptiness and awareness. Pure awareness as Rigpa here. Maybe self-"arising" (already is) gnosis= empty awareness.

Ma Rigpa = state sentient being. (not knowing)I think the linguistic meaning is less important. Also nature is not in text revealing.

1- Lets finish this horrible attack by someone who is attacking his former teacher in his interviews. Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict. Then because he was not good at languages, he accepted that term and used it for rigpa. Firstly ChNNR knows more languages than most people including western translators. He speaks some very well like Tibetan and Mongolian and Italian and some adequately like English and some he can get by . So he is very good at languages. Secondly presence and instant are Latin based and the Italian is almost the same. So he did not need anyone to tell him what those two words were! So this is a second evil lie as he was working in an Italian University when the major Samaya breaker was still crying for lollipops.

2- Now lets finish the essence of this evil attack. ChNNR uses the term 'presence' not for rigpa but for "trenshe (dran shes)" and says the opposite of this is yengwa (g.yeng ba)) or distraction. I don't want to quote a whole paragraph from a restricted book even if it is the introductory material (not detail or practices) and what he says often publicly anyway. But lets finish this once and for all. See for yourselves on the first page, second paragraph of "The Four Chogshag: The practice of Tregchod". So presence means non-distraction and trying to create the conditions to be in rigpa. This is a translation of a teaching in Tsegyalgar from 1996, copyrighted in 1998, when certain major samaya breakers now promoting various falsehoods publicly, were around.

3- In the next immediate paragraph, third, he tackles Rigpa. He says: "Rigpa means knowledge or understanding but not on an intellectual level: it means being in a state of presence." Rigpa is Vidya and Vidya is a special form, highest form, of knowledge. Having that or rather being it, manifests in various ways effortlessly including obtaining various types of wisdoms, yeshes, jnanas, prajnas, etc. and even siddhis depending on the level attained. I have always felt the best translation for Rigpa is "Being 'The Knowledge'". Not even 'being in the knowledge' but being it non-dual, as it, which is the most natural state anyway, if only we allow all to be as they are (4 chogshags of Tregchod). And 'The Knowledge' to emphasize it as unique and ultimate as opposed to lower levels of conceptual time-bound conditioned knowledges. Gnosis, wisdom and awareness are bad and misleading terms too. But like Vidya, the best translation for Rigpa is Rigpa.

4- He uses the opposites for justifying meanings as is the norm from lotsawa days of King Trisong in both paragraphs, which Namdrol also uses. This oppositional methodology is a modern Structuralist and Deconstructivist approach too.

5- Finally a word of advice. If you visit a physical location/site and you see major Samaya breakers who have attacked their former Dzogchen master in public, then don't walk away, RUN. This is the advice in many teachings. Even if they coordinate and quote each other regularly and call each other beyond doubt. There are many reasons not to have karma with major Samaya breakers who are non-regretful and in happy continuation but that is off-topic. Also if you are not a Samaya breaker but when quoted and told one of your masters is being mis-quoted and proven to you to check for yourself, as above, but you still persist in repeating those lies a week later by a major Samaya breaker's interview, then you really need to sort out the real root of that problem, quickly.

Heres a thought from a "newbie"...perhaps there just does not exist one single word in the English language that can adequately describe Rigpa? Perhaps translators need to find a combination or hyphenated word to get the idea across? or maybe even a short sentence? I have a short acronym I made up:R-restingI-inG gnosis ofP-Presence and A-AwarenessI am probably way off base but it seems to work for me...LOL

"But if you know how to observe yourself, you will discover your real nature, the primordial state, the state of Guruyoga, and then all will become clear because you will have discovered everything"-Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche

Unless one is a Lotsawa or putting in the effort in training to be one and already at a good level, then this continuing obsession with semantics' details by non-qualified people only becomes an obstacle to Rigpa which is beyond time, concepts and definitions anyway.

Yes, and the constant arguing about it amongst practitioners is SO much better. Didnt say that the 2 cents put in was worth anything more than 2 cents anyways...just a thought

"But if you know how to observe yourself, you will discover your real nature, the primordial state, the state of Guruyoga, and then all will become clear because you will have discovered everything"-Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche

Username wrote:Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict

Tashi delek,

When i may ask with whom is "he ' meant here?

Best wishesKY

Ask the one who said it in his interview: as you put it your all "knowing, he is seldom "wrong"", friend. BTW when debating in any field and as a refuting reply, by refering to your human source (whom is contested anyway) as an immaculate fount of all knowledge (not what issues/points/data/agreed sources/etc.), on a point of discussion and you state: "But so-and-so knowing, he is seldom "wrong"" then you just turned the debate into a comic show, at your own expense I might add. But you'll get away with such debating shenanigans regarding "The Dear Leader in North Korea" perhaps.

Username wrote:Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict

Tashi delek,

When i may ask with whom is "he ' meant here?

Best wishesKY

Ask the one who said it in his interview: as you put it your all "knowing, he is seldom "wrong"", friend. BTW when debating in any field and as a refuting reply, by refering to your human source (whom is contested anyway) as an immaculate fount of all knowledge (not what issues/points/data/agreed sources/etc.), on a point of discussion and you state: "But so-and-so knowing, he is seldom "wrong"" then you just turned the debate into a comic show, at your own expense I might add. But you'll get away with such debating shenanigans regarding "The Dear Leader in North Korea" perhaps.

Tashi delek Username,

By my latest post was it not my intention to let turn the debate in a comic (show). Everybody does know persons in a certain way. What is someones friend would result in anothers enemy, what is someones mother is someone else spouse etc.

I see regarding many discussions here friends with their foes, which does not count at all for me because i do not have the same "enemies". Besides that my enemies are not yours and i do not never try to convince you about why my enemies would /could etc. be also yours, otherwise it would turn in a comic.

Also would i inform the mentioned person (JLA)to defend himself, because it is all said without any possibility of a defence, so a very one sided show. I would not say that all is here slandering a person, but sometimes it feels like that. So we can avoid a one sided point of view.....

Further what i know is that JLA has so his specific argumentations with some persons in the world. But it are finally his / their case, and he / they has to solve them, or not.

Our position would be that we can learn a lot of those silly and endless fights with words / mind games and to not take a part into that dirty game(s).

Oh, on what was again (OUR) practice based?

OM MATRI MUYE SALE YE DU

Best wishesKY

Last edited by kalden yungdrung on Fri May 27, 2011 4:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.

THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNEDIF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGEHE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MANWHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD

Username wrote:Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict

Tashi delek,

When i may ask with whom is "he ' meant here?

Best wishesKY

Ask the one who said it in his interview: as you put it your all "knowing, he is seldom "wrong"", friend. BTW when debating in any field and as a refuting reply, by refering to your human source (whom is contested anyway) as an immaculate fount of all knowledge (not what issues/points/data/agreed sources/etc.), on a point of discussion and you state: "But so-and-so knowing, he is seldom "wrong"" then you just turned the debate into a comic show, at your own expense I might add. But you'll get away with such debating shenanigans regarding "The Dear Leader in North Korea" perhaps.

Tashi delek Username,

By my latest post was it not my intention to let turn the debate in a comic (show). Everybody does know persons in a certain way. What is someones friend would result in anothers enemy, what is someones mother is someone else spouse etc.

I see regarding many discussions here friends with their foes, which does not count at all for me because i do not have the same "enemies". Besides that my enemies are not yours and i do not never try to convince you about why my enemies would /could etc. be also yours, otherwise it would turn in a comic.

Also would i inform the mentioned person (JLA)to defend himself, because it is all said without any possibility of a defence, so a very one sided show. I would not say that all is here slandering a person, but sometimes it feels like that. So we can avoid a one sided point of view.....

Further what i know is that JLA has so his specific problems or argumentations with some persons in the world. But it are finally his / their problems, and he / they has to solve them, or not.

Our position would be that we can learn a lot of those silly and endless fights with words / mind games and to not take a part into that dirty game(s).

Oh, on what was again (OUR) practice based?

OM MATRI MUYE SALE YE DU

Best wishesKY

The comic reply of refering to his near immaculate status in response to a point of debate you avoided as usual, was not in your last (now penultimate) post as you claim, please read carefully before typing away.

kalden yungdrung wrote:

Namdrol wrote:

kalden yungdrung wrote:If JLA could prove his case then what would be the result?[/color]

As i have explained, Achard is wrong. ChNN does not translate rigpa as "presence".

N

Tashi delek,

Do not know about right or wrong here, sorry. But JLA knowing, he is seldom "wrong".

Best wishesKY

Secondly I'm sure due to his habitual nature and as someone else said elsewhere before you hinted, he now has problems with Bon masters too but he is nothing to me. You seem obssessed with the words 'friends and enemies'. Best debaters are impersonal and only focus on issues and points at hand, not refering to personalities illogically, which is honorable too.

Finally I am nevertheless experienced and wary of people who mainly practice childish word games with thinly disguised insincere intentions and constantly talk of lofty things but if hungry will eat each other alive without hesitation. I don't despise such people, merely pity them and remember them in my prayers.

muni wrote:Rigpa on it; knowledge for schoolstudents. There are many Rigpa's and combinations. In 'naked awareness' I see clear as emptiness and awareness. Pure awareness as Rigpa here. Maybe self-"arising" (already is) gnosis= empty awareness.

Ma Rigpa = state sentient being. (not knowing)I think the linguistic meaning is less important. Also nature is not in text revealing.

Ah.

HI Muni:

One of the problems you will face if you insist on translating rigpa as a awareness, is that you will be able to differentiate Dzogchen, etc. from the hindus who are always waffling on about "pure awareness". In reality, "awareness" is a word in english which requires an object.

"Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something. In biological psychology, awareness is defined as a human's or an animal's perception and cognitive reaction to a condition or event."

I know you are not a native English speaker, and so you may not be tuned into usage of English terms. Awareness is always an awareness of something. The basis is not a something. If you are aware of the basis as a something, then you immediately fall into samsara. This is the problem with using the term awareness for rig pa.

Knowledge in the other hand is more ambiguous word in English which actually involves real philosophical issues hence the discipline of epistemology i.e. the study of knowledge qua knowledge.

Rig pa in every sense of the word as it is used in opposition to ma rig pa has to do with knowing as opposed to ignorance. Some have described as the intersection between belief and truth, or "a justified true belief."

In this case, rig pa is justified, because it is based on a personal experience, true, because that experience can be verified by anyone, and a belief because in this case personal experience has lead us to a state personal verification of something that before hand be merely believed.

Anyway, people are free to believe what they wish, justified or not. It is my belief, one I think justified and true, that the English word awareness is not an adequate translation of rig pa almost every case.

muni wrote:Rigpa on it; knowledge for schoolstudents. There are many Rigpa's and combinations. In 'naked awareness' I see clear as emptiness and awareness. Pure awareness as Rigpa here. Maybe self-"arising" (already is) gnosis= empty awareness.

Ma Rigpa = state sentient being. (not knowing)I think the linguistic meaning is less important. Also nature is not in text revealing.

Ah.

HI Muni:

One of the problems you will face if you insist on translating rigpa as a awareness, is that you will be able to differentiate Dzogchen, etc. from the hindus who are always waffling on about "pure awareness". In reality, "awareness" is a word in english which requires an object.

"Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something. In biological psychology, awareness is defined as a human's or an animal's perception and cognitive reaction to a condition or event."

I know you are not a native English speaker, and so you may not be tuned into usage of English terms. Awareness is always an awareness of something. The basis is not a something. If you are aware of the basis as a something, then you immediately fall into samsara. This is the problem with using the term awareness for rig pa.

Knowledge in the other hand is more ambiguous word in English which actually involves real philosophical issues hence the discipline of epistemology i.e. the study of knowledge qua knowledge.

Rig pa in every sense of the word as it is used in opposition to ma rig pa has to do with knowing as opposed to ignorance. Some have described as the intersection between belief and truth, or "a justified true belief."

In this case, rig pa is justified, because it is based on a personal experience, true, because that experience can be verified by anyone, and a belief because in this case personal experience has lead us to a state personal verification of something that before hand be merely believed.

Anyway, people are free to believe what they wish, justified or not. It is my belief, one I think justified and true, that the English word awareness is not an adequate translation of rig pa almost every case.

Hi Namdrol,Rigpa is just okay. When one is wandering within strange woods, one tries out what is available. What is for others the best, must be used.